do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 844/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Moroccan exports of tinned goods to the European Union
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: CABEZON ALONSO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU financial instrument, EU production, Morocco, association agreement (EU), preserved product, production aid, restriction on competition, sea fish, storage premium, withdrawal from the market













EUR-Lex - 91996E0844 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0844

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 844/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Moroccan exports of tinned goods to the European Union  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0036 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0844/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: Moroccan exports of tinned goods to the European UnionIn view of the likely increase on the European market of tinned sardines from Morocco at a lower price than that of European produce, has the Commission considered taking any action to ensure that European tinned sardine producers are able to compete with their Moroccan counterparts, in view of the difference in their market prices?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (8 May 1996)As a follow-up to the conclusions reached at the meeting of the Council (fisheries) on 26 October regarding the Commission's report on the sardine market, ((COM(95) 320. )) and to soften the impact of the Association Agreement between the Community and Morocco, a range of specific measures has been implemented to provide increased support for the Community sardine industry and the canning industry in particular.One of these measures involves an increase in carry-over aid, including uprating of the sardine premium from 1996. This is intended to cover freezing and storage costs, for up to six months, in respect of stocks taken off the market when heavy landings drive prices down to withdrawal levels. With a cheaper raw material, the industry can spread its production over the year.Provision is also made for the reprogramming of the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to take account of the possible reorganization of production, processing and marketing in the sector in some major producer Member States.Nevertheless, it should be borne in mind that competition with Moroccan produce concerns not just prices, but quality and presentation too. As regards the latter, the EU canneries still dominate the market and must ensure that they continue to do so. As for prices, the changes to the market brought about by the latest tariff reductions have no significant impact on the conditions of competition (a 2% price differential in the retail price is unlikely to change consumer habits).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 858/96 by Alfred LOMAS to the Commission. Nuclear reactors
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament, LOMAS
Subjects: EAEC Treaty, International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear reactor, nuclear safety, safety standard, uranium













EUR-Lex - 91996E0858 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0858

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 858/96 by Alfred LOMAS to the Commission. Nuclear reactors  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0010 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0858/96 by Alfred Lomas (PSE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: Nuclear reactorsHow many nuclear reactors using highly enriched uranium (HEU) are currently in operation in EU States and, for each such reactor, what is the location, quantity of HEU used, year of first operation, expected number of further years of operation and operating authority (e.g. company, university)?What is the aggregate quantity of HEU in the programme, has any HEU at any of the reactors gone missing in the past and have all the reactors operated under safeguards for all of their lives?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (3 July 1996)In the Community, 50 research reactors and critical assemblies are subject to the safeguards specified in Chapter 7 of the Euratom Treaty.Among these facilities, 23 were originally designed to use uranium with an enrichment above 20% (highly enriched uranium-HEU). It should be noted however, that in the course of the US sponsored reduced enrichment for research and test reactors programme (RERTR), the objectives of which are widely supported by research reactor operators in the Community, many have already been or are in the process of being converted for the use of low enriched uranium.The quantity of nuclear fuel contained in the cores of these facilities depends on their size and purpose, but is typically of the order of several kilogrammes of uranium.All these facilities have been subject to safeguards under the Euratom Treaty since it became applicable to each of them and, as applicable, to International atomic energy agency (IAEA) safeguards. The Commission is satisfied that no HEU used in them has been diverted from its intended uses in the period they were under Euratom safeguards (Article 77(a) of the Euratom Treaty) and therefore that HEU has not gone missing from them during that period.Details of the name, operator and location of these facilities are given in the table below:>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 843/96 by Concepció FERRER to the Commission. Action to combat xenophobia
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament, FERRER
Subjects: Council of Europe, European Commission, cooperation policy, racism, xenophobia













EUR-Lex - 91996E0843 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0843

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 843/96 by Concepció FERRER to the Commission. Action to combat xenophobia  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0120 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0843/96 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: Action to combat xenophobiaIn view of the announcement by the Commission of initiatives relating to the temporary protection arrangements for refugees, asylum, immigration and urban delinquency and, in particular, its obvious determination to launch concerted action against racism and xenophobia;Having regard to the simultaneous efforts in this field by the Council of Europe by means of its draft protocol on the cultural rights of minorities and in view of its call for speedy ratification of the European Charter on regional and minority languages and the framework convention;In view of the Council of Europe's undoubted experience in such matters and the close relationship which has historically linked the Union with such a distinguished institution;1. Does the Commission not consider that there should be close cooperation between the two organizations to enable them to achieve greater success in their fight against xenophobia and their efforts to protect the rights of minorities?2. To what extent do such initiatives by the Commission reflect the spirit of the abovementioned Council of Europe draft documents?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (15 May 1996)The Commission considers that, in the matter of combating racism and xenophobia, cooperation with the Council of Europe needs to be strengthened. In its recent Communication on racism, xenophobia and anti-semitism, the Commission outlined the measures which it intends taking to this end ((COM(95) 653. )).The Commission monitors closely the activities undertaken by the Council of Europe against racism and xenophobia, especially those undertaken by the European Youth Campaign against Racism, Xenophobia, Anti-semitism and Intolerance, the European Committee on Migration (CDMG) and the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI). Naturally, the results of these activities are taken into account whenever it seems relevant and practicable to do so.The Commission also considers that cooperation with the Council of Europe needs to be strengthened in regard to the promotion and safeguarding of regional and minority languages and cultures. Accordingly, the Commission keeps a close eye on the Council of Europe's activities in this field, particularly with regard to the ratification of the European Charter of Regional or Minority Languages.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 803/96 by Jaak VANDEMEULEBROUCKE to the Council. Participation by constitutionally recognised regions at the IGC
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament, VANDEMEULEBROUCKE
Subjects: competence of the Member States, diplomatic representation, regional and local authorities













EUR-Lex - 91996E0803 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0803

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 803/96 by Jaak VANDEMEULEBROUCKE to the Council. Participation by constitutionally recognised regions at the IGC  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0029 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0803/96 by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Council (12 April 1996)Subject: Participation by constitutionally recognised regions at the IGC'Agence Europe' No. 6679 of Saturday, 2 March 1996 says that the Italian Presidency has recently announced the programme for the intergovernmental conference whose task is to evaluate and, if necessary, revise the Treaty on European Union.An extraordinary European Council will be held from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. on 29 March 1996 in Turin. The IGC itself will begin at 4 p.m. During the Italian Presidency, which runs until the end of June 1996, there will be three meetings at ministerial level: on 22 April, 13 May and 10 June. These meetings will coincide with the General Affairs Council. There will be ten meetings at ministerial representative level: on 1 and 2 April, 15 and 16 April and 21 and 22 May on citizenship; on 23 and 24 April, 2 and 3 May and 30 and 31 May on the Institutions; on 6 and 7 May, 14 and 15 May and 6 and 7 June on foreign policy. A tenth meeting, to consider the interim report to be submitted to the European Council in Florence, will be held on 17 June.1. Will regions with constitutionally recognised powers (e.g. German Länder and Belgian regions and communities) be represented at the opening of the IGC?2. In what way will such regions be involved in the work of the IGCa) at the meetings at ministerial level?b) at the ten meetings of ministerial representatives'?3. Will each of the regions be able to make its own views known about the IGC at these fourteen meetings? If not, how will their views be considered at the IGC? If the answer is in the affirmative, will they have the right to speak at the abovementioned meetings?Reply (16 July 1996)The Honourable Member is undoubtedly aware that the Council of the European Union is not a participant in the Intergovernmental Conference. It is for the Member States to determine the composition of their delegations to the Conference.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 838/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. The introduction of mobile operating theatres
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: EU Member State, civil defence, cooperation policy, medical device, surgery













EUR-Lex - 91996E0838 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0838

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 838/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. The introduction of mobile operating theatres  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0120 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0838/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: The introduction of mobile operating theatresThe health services in Israel are unfortunately required all too often to cope with dire emergencies. In Europe, as well, it might be an idea to introduce a number of ambulances, in addition to ordinary ambulances and emergency vehicles with nursing staff, equipped with operating theatres and staffed by medical personnel from casualty departments who could perform emergency operations on the spot.Is such a service already in operation in any of the Member States? Could the Commission not in any case propose that the Community Member States make provision for a number of ambulances (depending on the population of individual regions) of this kind with mobile operating theatres to carry out emergency treatment which could save lives?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (8 May 1996)The national civil protection services of at least six Member States are equipped with mobile surgery units, and these can very swiftly be made available to any other Member State that has suffered a major natural or technological disaster and needs some additional units to address the situation.This support in terms of specific resources is provided in the context of Community cooperation in the field of civil protection, on the basis of the Council Resolution of 8 July 1991 on improving mutual aid between Member States in the event of natural or technological disaster ((OJ No C 198, 27.7.1991. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 857/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Tinned petfood
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: animal disease, animal product, health certificate, health control, pet food, preserved product, product quality, veterinary legislation













EUR-Lex - 91996E0857 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0857

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 857/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Tinned petfood  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0092 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0857/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: Tinned petfood1. Is the Commission aware that tinned food for dogs and cats is reported to contain meat contaminated by parasites and viruses?2. Is it aware that a large number of dogs and cats kept as pets fall ill and die as a result of bad food?3. Is it aware that petfood manufacturers are using industrial waste, damaged agricultural produce and abattoir waste from sick animals?4. Does a legal basis exist for putting an end to this practice?Answer given by Mr Fischler (6 May 1996)The raw materials of animal origin from which the petfood is manufactured are obtained either from healthy slaughtered animals, the meat from which has been passed as fit for human consumption, or from low risk material, as defined by Council Directive 90/667/EEC ((OJ L 363, 27.12.1990, Directive as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden. )), which does not present serious risks of spreading communicable diseases to animals or man. Furthermore, Council Directive 92/118/EEC ((OJ L 62, 15.3.1993, as last amended by Commission Decision 96/103/EC of 29.1.1996 - OJ L 24, 31.1.1996. )) lays down specific animal health requirements for petfood containing low risk materials. In particular the petfood in hermetically sealed containers must be subjected to heat treatment to a minimum Fc value of 3,0.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 842/96 by Brendan DONNELLY to the Commission. Failure of Greek social security authorities to implement EC Regulation 1408/71
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, family benefit, migrant worker, social security













EUR-Lex - 91996E0842 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0842

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 842/96 by Brendan DONNELLY to the Commission. Failure of Greek social security authorities to implement EC Regulation 1408/71  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0091 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0842/96 by Brendan Donnelly (PPE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: Failure of Greek social security authorities to implement EC Regulation 1408/71On 12 January 1996 I put down a Written Question (E-3636/95) ((OJ C 326, 6.12.1995, p. 45. )) asking when the Commission would be taking legal action against the Greek Government for non-implementation of EC Regulation 1408/71 (1) ((OJ L 149, 5.7.1971, p. 2. )) in the matter of my constituent Mr A. Zafiropoulos. On 1 March 1996 I received an assurance that the Commission intends to bring legal action. Is the Commission now in a position to answer my question of 12 January as to when these proceedings will commence?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1996)The Commission can confirm that it has brought the matter before the Court of Justice.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 846/96 by Carles-Alfred GASOLIBA I BÖHM to the Commission. Exchange of non-university teachers under the Socrates programme
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament, GASOLIBA I BOEHM
Subjects: EU Member State, Spain, United Kingdom, educational exchange, language teaching













EUR-Lex - 91996E0846 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0846

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 846/96 by Carles-Alfred GASOLIBA I BÖHM to the Commission. Exchange of non-university teachers under the Socrates programme  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0121 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0846/96 by Carles-Alfred Gasòliba i Böhm (ELDR) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: Exchange of non-university teachers under the Socrates programmeAccording to Action 1 of the Socrates programme on school associations for the development of European educational projects there are grants available to facilitate exchanges of teachers for a maximum period of four weeks.In the case of the United Kingdom it is extremely difficult, if not to say virtually impossible, to organize such exchanges since applications from other Community countries have been blocked on the basis of a statement by the authorities concerned to the effect that there are no teachers available for such exchanges.Does the Commission not consider that the reasons why applications from other Community countries have been blocked should be investigated? What action is the Commission planning to take in order to solve this problem, which runs counter to the spirit of the Socrates programme?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1996)In the framework of the first year (1995-1996) of the implementation of Comenius Action 1 all the Member States participated in the teacher exchanges provided for in the partnerships between European schools, without reporting any particular difficulties.The United Kingdom proposed 113 teacher exchanges (out of a quota of 100) and Spain proposed 94 (out of a quota of 80).However, the Commission will contact the national agencies responsible for this decentralised measure in order to ensure its smooth implementation.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 851/96 by Hans-Gert POETTERING to the Commission. European pensioner' s identity document
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament, POETTERING
Subjects: EC recommendation, EU Member State, EU national, European Commission, Portugal, free movement of persons, identity document, reduced price, retired person













EUR-Lex - 91996E0851 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0851

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 851/96 by Hans-Gert POETTERING to the Commission. European pensioner' s identity document  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0122 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0851/96 by Hans-Gert Poettering (PPE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: European pensioner's identity documentGerman pensioners have recently been refused a reduction in public transport fares in the Netherlands even though Netherlands pensioners have been allowed to purchase tickets at reduced prices. This was justified on the grounds that these were not pensioners according to Netherlands law.I therefore ask the Commission1. Is there a uniform European pensioner's identity document?2. If not, is such a document necessary to be able to take advantage of the same concessions as are available to pensioners in the country of temporary residence concerned?3. What action will the Commission take to ensures that any such misunderstandings can be avoided in future?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (7 May 1996)There is no common European proof of pensioner status and there is no plan to propose harmonisation of Member States' policies in this area. There is however a Commission Recommendation of 10 May 1989 ((OJ L 144 of 27.5.1989. )) for the introduction of a common 'over sixties card' which would make existing rights of older people visible, especially when travelling outside their own Member State. No Member State has so far chosen to implement this recommendation. Portugal has however recently established a working group to examine the issue.The Commission is currently engaged, with non governmental organizations, in identifying measures by which progress might be made towards better access by older people to the concessions to which they are entitled. The aim is to develop models which Member States could adapt to meet their own particular circumstances. This could eventually provide a common basis for reciprocal benefits and mutual recognition within the Community. The results of a feasibility study should be available in mid 1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 862/96 by Christine CRAWLEY to the Commission. Sri Lanka
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: CRAWLEY, European Parliament
Subjects: Sri Lanka, human rights, international meeting, report













EUR-Lex - 91996E0862 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0862

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 862/96 by Christine CRAWLEY to the Commission. Sri Lanka  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0093 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0862/96 by Christine Crawley (PSE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)Subject: Sri LankaWould the Commission report on the outcome of its talks at the EU-Asia meeting and whether the question of human rights abuses in Sri Lanka was raised?Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (7 May 1996)The Commission has already reported to Parliament on 12 March 1996 on the outcome of the Bangkok meeting. The text of President Santer's speech will be forwarded to the Honourable Member immediately, as well as to the Secretariat-General of the Parliament.While the question of human rights was indeed raised, the specific case of human rights in Sri Lanka was not mentioned given that this country did not take part in the talks.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 796/96 by Hartmut NASSAUER to the Council. Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States of the European Union, adopted on 10 March 1995
Date: 1996-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament, NASSAUER
Subjects: administrative procedure, criminal procedure, extradition, member country, ratification of an agreement













EUR-Lex - 91996E0796 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0796

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 796/96 by Hartmut NASSAUER to the Council. Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States of the European Union, adopted on 10 March 1995  


Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0020 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0796/96 by Hartmut Nassauer (PPE) to the Council (12 April 1996)Subject: Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States of the European Union, adopted on 10 March 1995For each Member State, will the Council give the progress of ratification procedures as at 1 March 1996 for the Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States of the European Union, adopted on 10 March 1995 ((OJ C 78, 30.3.1995, p. 2. )).Reply (7 August 1996)The Council is not able to indicate the progress of ratification procedure as at 1 March 1996 for the Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States of the European Union, adopted on 10 March 1995.However, the Council can state that no Member State has ratified the Convention to date.